Atienza et al v. Wells Fargo et al

Filing 19

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Show Cause Response due by 11/10/2011.. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 10/27/11. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/27/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 ALICIA G. ATIENZA, et al., 9 No. C-11-3153 EMC Plaintiffs, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE v. 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 WELLS FARGO, et al., 12 Defendants. ___________________________________/ 13 14 15 Plaintiffs filed a complaint in this action on June 24, 2011. Docket No. 1. All defendants 16 with the exception of U.S. Bancorp filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ complaint, which this Court 17 granted with prejudice on September 2, 2011. Docket Nos. 14, 15 (Amended Order issued October 18 14, 2011). Thus, U.S. Bancorp is the only defendant remaining in this action. 19 Pursuant to Rule 4(l) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiffs are required to prove 20 service of Defendant U.S. Bancorp to the Court. “Except for service by a United States marshal or 21 deputy marshal, proof must be by the server's affidavit.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(l)(1). Furthermore, Rule 22 4(m) provides, in relevant part, 23 24 25 26 27 28 If a defendant is not served within 120 days after the complaint is filed, the court--on motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff--must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time. But if the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the court must extend the time for service for an appropriate period. 1 Since Plaintiffs filed their complaint on June 24, 2011, they were required to serve Defendant U.S. 2 Bancorp, and give proof of service to the Court, no later than October 24, 2011.1 3 Accordingly, the Court hereby issues this Order to Show Cause why this case should not be 4 dismissed without prejudice against U.S. Bancorp. Plaintiffs are instructed to file a response to this 5 Court no later than November 10, 2011, which includes either a proof of service to Defendant U.S. 6 Bancorp or an explanation as to why there is good cause for their failure to serve Defendant. Absent 7 proof of service or good cause, the Court will dismiss the action. 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 Dated: October 27, 2011 12 _________________________ EDWARD M. CHEN United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 1 28 While October 22, 2011, is 120 days after June 24, 2011, since October 22 fell on a Saturday, the deadline extends to the next business day. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a)(1)©. 2 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 2 3 ALIZIA G ATIENZA et al, 4 Case Number: CV11-03153 EMC Plaintiff, 5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE v. 6 WELLS FARGO et al, 7 Defendant. 8 9 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 12 / I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. That on October 27, 2011, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office. 13 14 15 16 17 18 Alicia G. 136 Saint Francis Boulevard San Francisco, CA 94127 Clodualdo A. 136 Saint Francis Boulevard San Francisco, CA 94127 19 20 21 Dated: October 27, 2011 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk By: Betty Lee, Deputy Clerk 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?